Both Google and Evernote offer an online tool for managing notes. This isn’t a review of each product’s capabilities, but an observation on their UIs. Evernote commits way too much real estate to administrative UI debris. I get a full 10.5 lines of writable space on a 800px high display. The rest is taken up by browser chrome and the note’s title, date, attributes, action bar, source, and terms of conditions.
Compare the following pictures showing the vertical space of each. In each, the usable real estate is highlighted. Both show the most fully maximized view that each offers.
Evernote:
Google notebook:
But that’s an unfair comparison you might say–the Google notebook is clearly taller.As I mentioned earlier, I was giving each the benefit of the doubt, showing the largest online view possible. Google offers a breakout version that strips off the unnecessary chrome and actions, leaving more space devoted to supporting the core function–taking notes.
On May 20, 2008, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Information Architecture, Usability, Interaction, Interface.
I just came across this on www.dusteddesign.com. In their tag navigation, the length of the link tag is proportional to the number of articles it contains. I can’t say this works, or that I’d employ it, but it’s interesting and I applaud their thinking.
On March 9, 2008, Todd posted this entry in Interaction, Interface.
This is undeniably cool. Via NYTimes.com, I learned about a new plugin for firefox called PicLens. It allows you to browse images as a 3D wall. Words really can’t describe how it works. Watch the video below for a demo.
On March 7, 2008, Todd posted this entry in Design, User Experience, Usability, Interaction, Interface, Development, methods.
A few days ago, I wrote a post on the Capstrat blog about this idea I’ve been working out. It’s called Pidgin, which is a diagramming tool to accomplish two goals in tandem. One, Pidgin is aimed at providing definition to what a UI needs to encompass. Second–but in unison–it needs to be less prescriptive of the visual design. So basically, it’s trying to situate itself in the pre-design phase, when requirements are solid but the design is still fluffy and unbounded. Check it out here. Manners dictate that I don’t cross post.
On March 1, 2008, Todd posted this entry in Design, User Experience, Interaction, Interface, Development, methods.
At work, we’re always looking for ways to better bring personas to the creatives and the developers. One idea that we’ve been tossing around is a physical moodboard for personas. I’m calling this the Stage.
The stage is a lo-fi, physical space where personas are built and refined. It is designed to evolve and to be a work in progress. Implemented, it resembles a mood board for personas.
Carrying a deep respect for the user throughout a project’s development is critical to user experience design. Knowing who we are designing for is the responsibility of all project members. Much of the information known about the users is contained within the minds of the UX designers. The product– formal persona documents– often do not communicate the research and insights that underpin them. Often, they lack the vivacity needed for others to empathize with the users they represent. Further, they don’t easily engage other parties in the research and design process.
Much of the information that describes the user is secondary to the persona. Quotes, thoughts, misgivings, apprehensions help develop the persona but can be overly summarized to make a tight, succinct document.
Additionally, personas don’t easily invite serendipity and evolution. Research doesn’t stop once a persona document is delivered. As time progresses, inevitably designers better understand users’ behaviors and desires. The Stage invites these small bits of information in an unstructured way. It encourages discussion, change and evolution. Viewers are able to respond to these artifacts and discuss the inferences and conclusions that are drawn.
As a physical space, the Stage asserts itself and demands attention. Permanence and visibility are key to its success. It needs to occupy a space that receives constant foot traffic and where close inspection is encouraged. As a dedicated space, it invites asynchronous interaction where people can respond to it on their own time.
The Stage requires simple ingredients. Foremost is a space to place the material. It should be waist to chest high and (for us) at least 4’ x 4’. The surface should be a surface that can be written on: butcher paper, a whiteboard or similar. Nearby should be a steady supply of post it notes, markers and tape. Materials added to the Stage include screenshots, pictures, quotes, brief bios, research findings and diagrams.
A visitor should be able to glance at it and assemble an idea of the persona without reading a lengthy document. People may feel free to add and remove items from a persona as they see fit. Questions may be added to the board for other designers to react to. Generally, the Stage should resemble a work in progress; it should not appear overly structured or precious. Staying orderly and presentable can discourage others from adding their own input.
The Stage is not a replacement for personas. It exists as a shared sketchbook, the results of which are formalized into the persona documents. During the development cycle, it is a continual reference point for all members of the project team. For people outside the project—clients, visitors, for example—the Stage is a demonstration of user-centered design. It indicates how we involve the user in our approach and serves as a discussion point to further evangelize the need for understanding the user. Succinctly, the Stage helps make the research process more transparent.
The name “stage” was borne of two ideas that are relevant to the concept. From theater, the stage connotes a place where characters are presented to an audience. The Stage can also be defined as an intermediate place where concepts are still being explored and refined. Both invoke the spirit and goals of the Stage.
On September 7, 2007, Todd posted this entry in User Experience, Information Architecture, Usability, Interaction, Interface.
Just wanted to post an update on some of the recent events that have occurred in the Phoenix usability community.
Christopher Brya has been hard at work assembling interested members and putting together the paperwork to create a UPA chapter in Arizona. In case you’re not aware, UPA
…supports usability specialists, people from all aspects of human-centered design, and the broad family of disciplines that create the user experience in promoting the design and development of usable products.
He’s even started a blog at arizonaupa.blogspot.com. Head over there and sign up for the mailing list. If you’re interested, leave a comment on the blog about what you’d like to see the group tackle.
Theo Mandel has started putting together the framework for our local World Usability Day Event. In his words,
I would like to announce the Phoenix event for World Usability Day 2007 on November 8, 2007. The Applied Psychology Program and Cognitive Engineering Research Institute at ASU’s Polytechnic Campus have graciously agreed to host the event on their campus in Mesa. The event will take place from 6-9 p.m. on the evening of Thursday, November 8, 2007. There will be no cost to participants to attend the event.
For more information, check out the full message at the PHX UEX Google group. If you’re interested in presenting (or sponsoring of course!) definitely throw your hat into the ring.
The latest UI blooper comes from a product questionably called Clarity. I’m really not sure I’m ready to call the administrator on this one. I think Clarity might be telling me something–something metaphysical.
How demoralizing, yet liberating. Perhaps I don’t have sufficient privileges to create a new idea. Maybe Clarity is an appropriate name after all.
I kind of wish Oracle pronounced this revelation though.
I noticed this date picker while using a bug ticketing system. The backstory is that I needed to enter in an estimated date for responding to a customer. Lo and behold, this dialog popped up with the option to select “BC”. I try to be proactive, but logging my response 4014 years prior to the original request is pushing it.
I can only presume that this picker was not written by the application’s developers but, instead, picked à la carte from prefab controls.
At work, I’m tied to Lotus Notes–that plucky little groupware client that refuses to die. I dare say that a single day passes where I’m not surprised by its brusque nature, awkwardness, and overall “unapproachability.” Today, I share with you the following dialog box that I received while trying to comment on a meeting request.
About two words into my comment, I decided that I really didn’t have anything useful to say. So, I tried to cancel out. If you look at that dialog, you’ll realize that Lotus has committed me to sending a message whether I like it or not.
I realized that there has been quite a resurgence of “command line” like (command-like?) interfaces. The collage below is by no means complete, but it does show a few products that use text UIs as a primary or auxiliary means of interaction.
Looking at the image from top-left to bottom-right:
flk ponies and you’ll receive Flickr results that match “ponies”.What is interesting is the decision to use this as a high-level interaction mode. One of the arguments against text-based interaction is that it obscures the interface and imposes a steeper learning curve on the user. On the other hand, command line enthusiasts note greater efficiency and flow.
Given that these examples cater toward an early adopter / power-user market, I’m inclined to feel that this UI is reasonable. It will be interesting to see whether any of these products–especially those that use text as the primary interface–make inroads with the more pragmatic users.
Oomblog is a stream of thoughts, ostensibly focused on user experience.
